Skip to main content

About your Search

20121108
20121116
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
paul ryan said is very interesting because we had an editorial on monday from glenn hubbard, mitt romney's economic adviser, essentially saying that yes, we recognize we need to talk about tax increases for the rich. i mean, he actually stressed that that should be the starting point of a discussion. he didn't say, glenn hubbard, that he increases -- he wants to see increases in tax rates. he was looking at closing loopholes, things like that, but he was willing to put that on the table. the problem, though, is that even if advisers like glenn hubbard are saying that, what we're seeing is people like paul ryan still very much signaling strong opposition to that idea. >> what's your head count in the senate, the number of republicans -- >> in the senate? >> yeah. >> i think the senate will pass whatever the leaders agree to. i think like with most of these things now, they'll have to go to the house floor without knowing -- without the votes. the question is who can you lose and still pass it? you'll lose some liberal democrats, but i think you're going to get a base support of dem
that the president is committed to that same thing? absolutely we do. >>> also congressman paul ryan is dismissing suggestions that president obama's victory gives his administration a mandate to raise taxes on the rich. returning to capitol hill yesterday for the first time since the election, ryan pointed the republicans keeping control of the house as a sign that the country isn't sold on the democrats' agenda. take a listen to this. >> whether the people intended or not, we've got divided government. >> you don't think there's a mandate here? >> i don't because then they would have put nancy pelosi in charge of the house of representatives. see, i think these ideas that we talked about, i think they're popular ideas. this is a very close election. and unfortunately, divided government didn't work very well the last two years. we're going to have to make sure it works in the next two years. that means, i think, that both parties have to talk to each other. >> but could you see yourself supporting a plan that raises tax rates? >> i'm not for raising tax rates. >> so you won't support a plan? >>
quick point. one is very interesting role the paul ryan will play from this point on. paul ryan was simultaneously a loser and a winner on tuesday night. a winner because he won his house seat, a loser for the obvious reason but also for a couple of additional ones. it's kind of embarrassing when you put on the ticket and you can't carry your own state. but also his percentage and his own district went down significantly. at the same time there is no question that paul ryan, it was a national figure but far more recognized by those of us in the intellectual world and the cometary and then by others. paul, you go, could've walked through any airport outside of wisconsin or washington in america and might well have gone unnoticed. now obviously he is a significant national figure and include one in the mix for 2016. but he's in the next four that kind of conservative community that has dominated the primary and caucus process before. and going along with these kinds of compromises that include tax increases as part of a package, he comes a little trickier for him. and it also beco
interesting role the paul ryan will play from this point on. paul ryan was simultaneously a loser and a winner on tuesday night. a winner because he won his house seat, a loser for the obvious reason but also for a couple of good additional ones. it's kind of embarrassing when you're put on a ticket and you cannot carry your own state and also his percentage in his own district went down significantly. at the same time there is no question that paul ryan who was a national figure who was far more recognized by those of us in the intellectual world than by others. paul a year ago could have walked through any airport outside of wisconsin or washington in america and might well have gone unnoticed other than maybe by one or two people and now obviously he is an enormously significant figure in clearly won in the mix for 2016. he is in the mix for that kind of conservative community that is dominating the primary and caucus process before and going along with these kinds of compromises that include tax increases as part of the package comes a little trickier for him and it also becomes trickier f
should we have picked mitt romney, well you did. should he have picked paul ryan? absolutely, he's a smart political figure and has a lot to taufer party and resonated well with the electorate. so all of that second guessing is typical washington inside crazeness. you need to hunker down and look at your ground game and your organization and your message and mess jers. we need mess jers who look like me. we need mess jers who are hispanic, asian american, women cross section of folks who represent communities all across the country. host: your successor of the republican national committee may seek a second term as chair of the party. what are you hearing? guest: i've heard people say that and that's a decision he will make on his own. and the party will judge whether losing two senate seats and the presidential and not much of a ground game is worthy of a reelection. host: a landslide loss for big money. voters ignored most of the outside ads but the danger of unlimited spending remains and a lot of focus on american cross roads and the money spenlt by carl rove. those people sh
andrew cuomo. the republicans have their own starting lineup. paul ryan, who played the role of understudy in this campaign, new jersey governor chris christie, even though some conservative republicans blame him for his high-octane embrace of president obama. florida senator marco rubio on a fak fast track who say he's the republican solution to the problem with hispanics. >> if i'm a serious policymaker, i'll have a lot of opportunities to do different things in politics, outside of politics. >> and there are some party leaders who are still long for former florida governor jeb bush. you can argue that it is too early to even be thinking about 2016, but ask yourself, when did barack obama first start dreaming about becoming president? craig. >> andrea mitchell, thanks to you for some smart speculation. now let's bring in the brain trust. joan walsh, editor at large for salon.com. also an msnbc political analyst. perry bacon, the editor for "the g rir grio." this is a limit brain trust. sometimes we have to fake it. not today. let's pick up the here. let's start with where a
cliff. we need solutions and not sequestration. >> jonathan karl did an interview with paul ryan and what paul ryan said in this is essentially that, that the president doesn't have a mandate. karl said he won some 300 some electoral votes, every battleground state except for north carolina. does president obama have a mandate and, and he said no, i don't think so. because then nancy pelosi would be in charge of the house of representatives. and she's not. do you think that he's got a point? >> you know what has a mandate? solutions have a han date. this election was about solutions. people are tired of the gridlock. they're tired of a congress that spent more time trying to shut down planned parenthoods and open up small business. compromise has a mandate. we go into a new session of congress and towards this fiscal cliff, again, having stated we want compromise. we want solutions. we want -- and by the way, in this election, most of the tea party generals, you know, the icons of the tea party, they ended up getting defeated in this election. so that's the mandate we have. >> so
significantly less enthused. and remember paul ryan's speech the fading obama posters on the walls. hah, hah, hah. isn't that wonderful eddie? it was a complete load of bull [ censor bleep ]. >> stephanie: voters under 30 made up 19% of the electorate. trumps meltdown. >> it's a squeaker. >> stephanie: yeah. if you thought karl rove's five stages of grief was one, you should have seen donald trump's tweet. right. let's fight like hell and stop this disgusting injustice. the world is laughing at us. no, the world is laughing at you. [ applause ] [ bell chimes ] >> stephanie: oh and did he mention elizabeth warren won. ♪ nah, nah, nah ♪ >> stephanie: all right. russell in delaware. >> caller: what is up baby. when you moved your radio show to the tv i wasn't too enthusiastic, but now immediately to your left and behind you you have provided us with a nice booty cam. now about these republicans -- [ laughter ] >> caller: okay. if you think -- i know that you have a brother, and we all have republicans that we love or are at least fond of. >> stephanie: right. >> caller: and
do the paul ryan budget, since he's still there. >> stephanie: yeah he's still there. >> caller: he's still there, and the fact that not only did republicans lose in the senate, but they lost to having some of the most liberal members. bernie sanders finally has people to play with in the senate. more people to play with, sips he had a couple before, but, you know, the idea that the country is not just shifting because of color, and because of where people are coming from, but because of what they believe. they actually, that you've shifted so far to the right that all people look at you and just are appalled. >> stephanie: right. i have to say, this was, you know your closing piece is the best advice you can give them. stop being jerks. as joe biden said, get out of the way. stop being gentlemen, to women immigrants gays, union members. just stop. if you don't understand how the gop strategy has affected you than you're damned to be a party of bodies in the road. if you haven't learned your lesson, you know nothing about the united states. >> caller: you know that i've not always b
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)